This Article  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

JOHN E. KVETON, MD
Burlington, Mass

Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1987;113(6):593.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

The problem of lack of standardization in recording results of acoustic tumor surgery was addressed by Charles M. Luetje, MD, of Kansas City, Mo, at the Eastern Section Meeting of the Triological Society. Through a review of 110 acoustic tumor resections, the author outlined the importance of each category that must be reported, including (1) tumor size on computed tomographic scan or magnetic resonance imaging in millimeters or centimeters, using the lateral aspect of the internal auditory canal to the medial extent of the tumor as one measurement and the largest tumor diameter paralleling the petrous ridge as the second; (2) the status of the fourth ventricle (normal, indented, or displaced); (3) preoperative and postoperative audiograms with pure tone and speech discrimination scores and brain-stem audiometry; (4) the surgical approach used, as well as notation of total or partial resection; (5) specific description of the anatomic preservation of the facial . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Facebook    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?